HardRock Vs RockHopper

_Tyler_Durden_ · June 2007

Okay, I have been looking at buying a 2006 Specialized.

Just wondering what my extra œ150 would buy me if I decided on the RockHopper.

Thanks

BTR · June 2007

I'm assuming you're buying the very lowest spec rockhopper and very lowest spec hardrock.
-Better forks
-Better brakes
-Better gearing
-Better wheels

Pretty much better everything.

<hr noshade size="1">
<center>Static Plan B</center>

Flurry · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by BTR

I'm assuming you're buying the very lowest spec rockhopper and very lowest spec hardrock.
-Better forks
-Better brakes
-Better gearing
-Better wheels

Pretty much better everything.

<hr noshade size="1">
<center>Static Plan B</center>
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

i thought he meant the highest HR and the lowest RH

<hr noshade size="1">
[}:)]
_\_/\_/\_/\__,

The Joe Show · June 2007

The Hardrock is more of an all-rounder, the Rockhopper is more geared towards cross country.

<hr noshade size="1"><center>Twenty
Carrera
Nissan
 
Myspazzzzz
WDI</center><hr noshade size="1">

dave_s · June 2007

The œ150 is money well spent.
The Rockhopper is a lighter bike and is good for XC/AM.
The Hardrock is a good bike too but the Rockhopper is a better bet if you can afford the extra.
If you're doing jumps and drops, you're better looking elsewhere than either of those 2 bikes even though they are quite strong, they're not built for that type of riding really.
As XC/AM bikes though they're fine

_Tyler_Durden_ · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by dave_s

If you're doing jumps and drops, you're better looking elsewhere than either of those 2 bikes
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Any more specific recommendations?

Flurry · June 2007

specialized P series

that said, the HR will manage some light stuff (click on worm head in sig)

<hr noshade size="1">
[}:)]
_\_/\_/\_/\__,

Red Lemon · June 2007

Trouble is, of the P. series, only one of them will be any good for longer distance riding, and that's the œ800 P. All Mountain.

What exactly is your budget? A 2006 Kona Hoss is a good bet for more punishing riding. It's tough, has excellent handling and feels lighter than it is. I'm not gonna lie to you, the fork on it is pretty pants, but it's tough and will take the abuse better than anything else in the price range.

_Tyler_Durden_ · June 2007

Budget stands at around œ500.

Red Lemon · June 2007

If you can stretch to œ550, clicky

_Tyler_Durden_ · June 2007

I like the look of that.

Are the Kona's lighter than the Rockhopper?

What about the Cinder Cone (rrp œ599) or the Caldera (rrp œ699)? Both now at œ499.

_Tyler_Durden_ · June 2007

Or how about a Gary Fisher Bitter?

http://www.evanscycles.com/product.jsp?style=60490

dave_s · June 2007

Tyler, the Kona Hoss isn't lighter than the Rockhopper but it will be quite alot stronger.
The Cinder Cone and Caldera would be for the same type of riding as the Rockhopper (XC/AM).
I didn't know what type of riding you were looking at but assumed it was XC/AM given your original choices being a Hardrock and a Rockhopper.
If you are doing drops and jumps then the Kona Hoss is a better choice since it's build specifically for heavier riders.
Also worth looking at would be Norco hardtails
http://www.awcycles.co.uk/brands/Norco/ ... index.aspx
These also will be a fair bit heavier than the Rockhopper but will be stronger.
The Hardrock is already quite a heavy frame so they might not be alot heavier than that though

_Tyler_Durden_ · June 2007

I am interested in saving weight, and not likely to be getting into any serious drops or jumps.

dave_s · June 2007

Then the Rockhopper is a decent choice.
Or this isn't a bad price for a Kona Kula

Or this Stumpy frame if you want to upgrade instead of buy
http://www.bikescene.co.uk/moreinfo.php ... 171&sale=0

hickster5000 · June 2007

I went for the Rockhopper over the Hardrock last year and have never looked back. The 06 disc model (which I believe you can pick up for around œ550 now if you search around) has a great frame and brakes to start out with and as you progress you can easily upgrade the rest. The expensive hardrock has the max level of componentry you would ever want to put on it already attached, whereas the rockhbopper will happily merit new mechs, forks, bars etc. If you can stretch to a more expensive frame ie Rockhopper, Caldera etc, you will thank yourself in the long run.

Red Lemon · June 2007

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by hickster5000
The expensive hardrock has the max level of componentry you would ever want to put on it already attached
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
No it doesn't. Ok, so it'd be a bit silly to put EC90 finishing kit, XTR drivetrain and a Pace RC39 on a Hardrock, but there's still plenty of room left to upgrade with a few choice bits, especially a better fork like an MX Comp.

hickster5000 · June 2007

Fair comment RL,

what I meant to say is, if you're spending in that range for a bike, one with a better frame will take more upgrading and probably give a more satisfying experience long term. And if I remember rightly, when I was comparing the two the rockhopper feels a lot lighter and more sure-footed.

But you are right, a new fork, tyres, grips etc would make a lot of difference to a hardrock, and would probably be worthwhile

mongooseTE17 · June 2007

Dont get the hoss its got terrible forks. You should look at the kula and caldera alough there are a bit over budget.

My Elite!

HardRock Vs RockHopper

Comments

Categories